George Ho

Welcome to Meta!

Hello, George Ho. Welcome to the Wikimedia Meta-Wiki! This website is for coordinating and discussing all Wikimedia projects. You may find it useful to read our policy page. If you are interested in doing translations, visit Meta:Babylon. You can also leave a note on Meta:Babel or Wikimedia Forum (please read the instructions at the top of the page before posting there). Happy editing!

-- Meta-Wiki Welcome (talk) 04:23, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Notification

Hello, if I will make any statement here, everything what I will say will be twisted by Ark25. We have had debates regarding his behaviour for over three years, and I incline to stay away from any additional discussions with this user. He was banned from ro.wp for flooding the project's pages with external links from newspapers, magazines, tabloids, etc, without carrying if an external link is appropriate or not for a particular subject. This is the real reason, and even on this Request for Comments, it is clear, that he refuses to get the point.

Please do not move this comment on that page, as I do not want to get involved again in a non-sense discussion. I wrote to you out of courtesy. Take care,––Silenzio76 (talk) 20:19, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Beeblebrox, what to do about the above comment? May I copy and paste this? --George Ho (talk) 21:05, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

No. You may not. I made it very clear that I do not want to be part of that discussion. I would really appreciate if you would respect this request.--Silenzio76 (talk) 21:20, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Inspire Campaign survey on outreach to outside knowledge networks

Thanks for your participation during the Inspire Campaign focused on outreach to outside knowledge networks from February 2017. I'm interested in hearing your experience during the campaign, so if you're able, I invite you to complete this brief survey to describe how you contributed to the campaign and how you felt about participating. I want to improve how campaigns are run, so let me know if there's something that could be done better for next time.

Please feel free to let me know on my talk page if you have any questions about the campaign or the survey. Thanks! I JethroBT (WMF) (talk) 18:34, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

(Opt-out instructions)

Survey link error fixed

Hi there, there was a error with the Inspire survey link that caused the survey to be shown as expired, but has now been fixed. The link in the above message should now bring you to the survey. Apologies, I JethroBT (WMF) 19:20, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Notifying Albanian Wikipedia community

Hi George Ho, I read your concern here [[1]]. You can easily notify or talk with other users in Shqip Wikipedia in English. You can contact certain editors if you find it easier. You can also contact me, on my talk here, on Shqip or English Wikipedia. Emailing me is an option too. Best. Ktrimi991 (talk) 13:33, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Please close Iloko Wikipedia

The Ilocano Wikipedia has more about languages than the others. Please close this wiki because this is only used by about languages. --Cyrus noto3at bulaga (talk) 02:31, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Re: Wikimedia Forum

IMHO not. There isn't a significant disruption, while inability to have discussions with everyone would be terrible. --Nemo 06:03, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

The entry

Thank you George. You're perfectly free to correct it. SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 21:10, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. I don't know the enwiki Project namespace (those policies, guidelines, essays, other stuff). That's why I made that mistake. I fixed it. SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 21:33, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Talk:Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2017/Cycle_3#Encyclopedic_model

Do you think your comment is useful? For whom? And why? Of course there might be any number of additional or alternative projects. But I happen to like Wikipedia and enjoy contributing. And I'd like to remind WMF that the happy readers of our Wikipedia are paying their salaries, so they should not cut the branch they are sitting on. If they want to start something new, they should expect to look for new contributors, because we - the community - are self selected encyclopedia nerds. And many if not most of us will not suddenly convert to video tutorial creators or build and fill a database for the semantic web that does not use full sentences, paragraphs and articles. --h-stt !? 14:02, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

I sent you a reply there. --George Ho (talk) 18:06, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

From me also: Thanks for Your care and mail, but comments like "Umm... we know that Wikimedia ≠ Wikipedia, Magiers, right?" are not necessary and will drive me out of further conversations. --Magiers (talk) 21:57, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

I struck out opening sentence, Magiers. --George Ho (talk) 22:01, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

re: RFC discussions about Arabic Wikipedia

Hello George. I am sorry for being late on this (I am not really using my volunteer account much lately, and it is also a busy time of the year for us). Anyway, thank you for notifying me on this. It seems one of the two requests is already closed, I will check on the other, which seems to be a little long, and see if I have something useful to contribute. As for the elections thing: it is totally alright, I did not really expect to win, but I liked the experience :) I am probably not going to explore other opportunities, though. Hopefully, someone else will --Abbad (talk) 12:38, 7 July 2017 (UTC).

Re: Need update on Cycle 3 in local wikis

It's up to local coordinators when they decide to update respective pages and inform communities. For example, I needed to take a day off, that's why I'm updating today. The question about dewiki should be directed to Gereon.

Btw, on enwiki and other sites I deal with, I don't hide the Cycle 1 insights and references, so both of the existing challenges can be discussed. Similarly, in the third week of July, Challenge 2 will be visible by default, so two days earlier or later should make no difference. Additionally, AFAIK, challenge 3 and 4 materials should show up earlier (on Wednesdays or Thursdays), and the coordinators will have more time to prepare. SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 12:49, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Abuse at Romanian Wikipedia

Please continue at Requests for comment/Extreme abuses at the Romanian Wikipedia if you may. Thanks. BTW, Ark25, no worries. But as said, continue there. --George Ho (talk) 00:38, 25 July 2017 (UTC) (click to expand or collapse)

Hey George Ho, I find that this Requests for comment/Extreme abuses at the Romanian Wikipedia is extremely political, I can't help but to think you are about to find yourself mired with trouble, are you fine?--AldNonymous^Bicara? 22:41, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

AldNonymous... may you please explain how I'm in "trouble"? Thanks. --George Ho (talk) 22:51, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

I have experience dealing with case like this at id.wp (about Minang people, etc), what you got is actually Silenzio76 personal hatred for Moldovan-Romanian related cases, secondly despite his bias he hate (serious hate) about hoax medicine like herbalism and stuff (The stuff that Ark25 writes), combine the two and put it in Ark25, voila!, I now can understand all this personal hatred from Silenzio76 for Ark25, I suspect Silenzio76 knows Ark25 IRL, this causes the hate. Not to mention Ark25 is wikidragon (again, similar to Indonesian Wikipedia problem with our own wikidragon Erik Fastman-we hate this guy so we vote this guy to become an admin, and now id.wp got extra 100K articles out of nowhere, problem solved lol), this was old school case about high content, low patrol, politically fueled content. Now about you on this case, the problem is about you being in the center of this, when you support one side and condemn the others you will be hated by the other side, you are in for a long-long arduous wikihounding. Though on other note, want some help?--AldNonymous^Bicara? 22:58, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

AldNonymous, hate is a strong word, I could assure you that I don't hate, so far, anything in life. :). All the best, --Silenzio76 (talk) 09:02, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

All right... Please help yourself there. Meanwhile, what to do with newly created Requests for comment/2017 issues on Romanian Wikipedia, AldNonymous? --George Ho (talk) 23:02, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Ahem, I was actually saying (implicitly) to help you pull out from those cases and leave it alone, but well, since you are thinking about actually wanting to help, I can give some opinion, about Requests for comment/2017 issues on Romanian Wikipedia. First what you must do is to never compare en.wp with any small Wikipedia if you never have experience dealing with legacy wikipedia (Wikipedia that exist by Jimmy wales approval and exist long before meta wikimedia even exist). In the old times 'crat and admins enjoy big privileges and can do almost anything on their wiki, and this has become a local custom, not even people from meta can change this. Second, since you can't resolve this, ask steward for opinion at Stewards' noticeboard.--AldNonymous^Bicara? 23:11, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

No, no.... If I can't compare, then... I'll withdraw that "2017" page. Is that fine, Aldnonymous? Also, I thought I could facilitate well because I didn't understand much. However, I guess you want me out of the RFCs, right? If that's it, well... How can you get me out of the cases and let them flow? --George Ho (talk) 23:16, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Also, you're saying that I should not mention "PROD", right? --George Ho (talk) 23:19, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

On second thought, I've been thinking, Aldnonymous. If you know so much about those two, why do you think I would be getting myself into trouble? Why not go into the ongoing RFC and make a statement there? --George Ho (talk) 00:31, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

First, just never bring en.wp rules to other smaller Wikipedia, those local communities will taking it wrongly. Second, it's because I know so much about stuff like these I avoid it like avoiding a plague, it's never end until one of the sides is blocked permanently and globally.--AldNonymous^Bicara? 00:36, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

I requested deletion on Requests for comment/2017 issues on Romanian Wikipedia as comparison between en.wp and ro.wp, Aldnonymous. Is that fine? --George Ho (talk) 01:12, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

@Aldnonymous: it is not my job to interfere in the decision-making process, but let me tell you that this is not a personal hatred of Silenzio76 against Ark25. The fact that he explained the reasons for a decision taken at ro.wiki does not mean he hates someone, but only that he explained the reasons for that decision - including on behalf of others. On the contrary, it was one of us who tried most to talk with Ark25 before it was blocked. --Accipiter Q. Gentilis (talk) 09:59, 20 July 2017 (UTC) P.S. There is a story about a soldier and an emperor. The soldier told the king bad news, and the king cut off his head because the news was not good news. So Silenzio76 is like that soldier, why should we cut his head because we don't like the news he brought ?

Sorry to interfere. I don't know Silenzio76 in real life and he doesn't know me either. There is no hate involved here. There is some huge despise involved though, and that all comes from Pafsanias towards me - he is probably still a bit too young, I guess. But there is also some serious disliking against me as the recent storm against me clearly showed a wave of uncontrolled fury. Silenzio76 is totally convinced that I'm disruptive and a troll and that I'm clearly defective beyond repair but he tries to stay calm and without emotions - you don't have to hate the bug, just to squash it. He just doesn't understand that the people have the right to answer the accusations against themselves. He really doesn't understand that nobody is above the law. He is an admin, and he is convinced that he is always right simply because he has the power. The rules do not apply for him. He can bend the rules and as he pleases in order to serve his purposes. How can you obey something that it's your creation and that is below your level? It's a mindset where it's all about level and status, probably coming from a highly patriarchal/parochial/hierarchical attitude. And this attitude generates all the rest of the errors he is making: you have no right to answer the accusations, you must only say positive things about the accusations, you are not allowed to believe in this or that, you are not allowed to disagree, insulting-cursing-screaming towards you are the right way to deal with you (since you are so disruptive because he dislikes you), blocking you for edits made with years or decades before is absolutely fine and so on.

As for me, I don't believe that I have an inflexible position. I just want to have a restricted user - one edit per month. If that's too much, then one edit per year. I really can't see how can I be more flexible than that. Shall I apply for one edit per decade maybe? Then how about an edit every 30 years? What else should I do in order to prove that I am willing to compromise? They have to remove their inflexible position in order to make any communication possible, because they keep claiming that they did absolutely nothing wrong. In case they will allow me to have a restricted user, then they will block me whenever they want, for whatever reason they want. So they must adjust their attitude quite a little bit.

Indeed, I created articles about pseudoscience, and I quoted various fancy claims. I haven't promoted those claims, I just quoted them. Quoting fancy claims provides a good reference, showing to the reader to see that all kind of fancy claims were made since years and years ago. Many times the charlatans are simply repeating fancy claims made before, speculating the fact that the public is not even aware that the same claims were made 5,10,50 or 100 years ago. So I really believe that my work is actually doing a good job against pseudoscience. But strangely, these admins believe that I somehow desire to promote pseudoscience. They claim that I should dismantle those fancy claims, by proving them wrong. Well, I would like to be able to do that, but many times nobody in the scientific community bothers to prove that those fancy claims are wrong, so I have no references to use in order to dismantle such fancy claims. At the English Wikipedia there is no such request to dismantle fancy claims and you can simply quote what the "extraordinary people" declare.

I really don't belive that, if George Ho or anyone else takes sides, they will be haunted by anyone. I was strictly naming those people were part of the storm against me and launched a lot of strange and comical accusations against me. There are others who are on their side, who dislike me simply as an effect of the waves made by this conflict. In short, as long as you take sides but you don't come with strange accusations against me, I'm not going to react. The other side will probably react very similar.

But in any case, I think this Romanian Wikipedia underlines a bigger Wikipedia issue: The small Wikipedias have small communities, incapable to solve such issues. Therefore, the rule that says that small Wikipedias should handle themselves is completely broken. It's like asking an infant to handle himself - an impossibility. Such a rule sounds nice, it looks clear, quintessential and wonderful - but it simply doesn't make sense for the small communities. The admins there tend to become abusive because the Wikipedia project keeps in place a broken rule, pure in form but devoid of meaning.

And I really don't believe in the solution proposed by AldNonymous, to block one side permanently and globally. This issue doesn't spill on mine activity nor on their activity on French or Spanish or German Wkikipedia. If there will be no solution for me, then at very least this complaint will make the abusive admins think again before doing such things again to someone else. The people who will experience the things that I experienced will be encouraged to come forward and to defend themselves. It can also build towards a better understanding of the inner workings of small Wikipedias. Many positive outcomes.

Sorry for the long answer. —  Ark25  (talk) 00:28, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

Short explanation

Before You engage in something [2], ask the people concerned.
A vandal has sexually harassed our female user with this message [3] ("invitation" for fellatio), and that bully still shamelessly dares to complain, hiding his dirty behaviour under alleged "blocking because of his nationality". Kubura (talk) 06:30, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

All right, Kubura. I'll ask people first before doing something. But why before making an edit there? As for that edit, that happened in 2009, eight years ago. How would that hold up well? --George Ho (talk) 06:51, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

We must protect women against such verbal violence. Saying such things ("come and suck ...") is not just NSFW, but a prompt firing. Am I wrong? Ask the women for the opinion. Ask the women from the Board of Trustees [4]: how would they react to a such message?

Personally, I am now even more concerned that I did the wright thing. That harasser not only insulted the woman, but also he showed no feeling of guilt for his behaviour, and even more, he finds the targeted/victim population as the aggressor! He pushes aside his act, "it's never problem with him, it's always the others".

Man, even the congresmens' and senators' careers are endangered if they say something like that ("come and suck my ...."). Kubura (talk) 07:06, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

I hope you were being sarcastic when you said "I'll ask people first before doing something". You don't need anyone's permission to engage in any discussion. – Srdjan m (talk) 11:07, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Few advices

Hello, George. When talking about something, please, ask the users concerned. This page [5] or similar topics always activate approximately few weeks before the anniversary of Croatian liberatory military operation Oluja. These days every year in Croatian media there is a ongoing fight among politicians, journalists, publicists and others about that topic. Accusations and stuff.
Especially recent years: last year about this time a cardinal (hr:Alojzije Stepinac) has been fully rehabilitated on the court, this year the chairman of Croatian national cultural society hr:Filip Lukas. Both were condemned on the Yugoslav Communist court. Last year about this time also a monument to a Croatian revolutionary was revealed (hr:Miro Barešić), with the presence of the representatives of Croatian Government.
The "left" and "Yugoslavia-restaration" activists are very active these days. These days started the discussion about the oath of the Croatian President: should the "so help me God" be in that oath or not. The activists pushed thing so far that Constitutional court had to say that that part is not opposing to the Constitution.[6] ('Tako mi Bog pomogao' nije suprotno Ustavu), July 25, 2017
When the activists attack, they choose no means, behaving :"The heavier the accusation, the better". I so this message. That "white washed fascist movement symbol"[7] (as VS6507 wrote on 04:45, 21 November 2015; BTW VS6507 is permanently blocked for harassing female colleague with "come and suck my ....") is a regular symbol Croatian national TV. [8][9] (in the corner up left) Have a look.
Please, don't allow yourself that vandals pull You by the nose. They are wasting Your precious time. Please, don't allow that discontents misguide and misinform You. Kubura (talk) 06:56, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Re: Informing all communities onwiki about the draft of the Direction

Yes, they should and they will. I waited for an official info about the launch, and after Katherine's post on mailing lists, today (imho) can count as day 1. I'll send messages to village pumps on many mid-sized wikis. (Nobody besides the drafting committee really knew when day 1 would come.) SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 08:06, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

Proposals for closing projects/Closure of Nahuatl Wikipedia 2

Hello; In this page, is over second closure for Nahuatl Wikipedia. Regards.--Marrovi (talk) 06:44, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Commond deletion bot requirements

I'm contacting you because you supported the Commons Deletion Bot proposal in the 2017 Community Wishlist. The Wishlist team has finalized the draft specifications for how the bot will work, and are seeking review in confirming or discussing the plans for the bot. If you have some time, please take a look and leave a comment. Thanks, happy editing to you. - Keegan (WMF) (talk) 19:06, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Commons deletion notification bot

Greetings,

You are receiving this message because you supported the Commons deletion notification bot in the 2017 Community Wishlist Survey.

Commons deletion notification bot is ready to be deployed to any Wikimedia wiki that wishes to use it. If your community is interested in the bot, you can leave a request on the project page on meta-wiki. The bot messages are available for translation on translatewiki.net, as part of preparing the bot for release.

Thank you for your participation in the Wishlist. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 17:29, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

The Community Wishlist Survey

Hi,

You get this message because you’ve previously participated in the Community Wishlist Survey. I just wanted to let you know that this year’s survey is now open for proposals. You can suggest technical changes until 11 November: Community Wishlist Survey 2019.

You can vote from November 16 to November 30. To keep the number of messages at a reasonable level, I won’t send out a separate reminder to you about that. /Johan (WMF) 11:24, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Potential copyright infringement at Bosnian Wikipedia!

Hi George Ho! If I can ask you to investigate a potential copyright infringement on bs. wikipedia. This is the article "bs:Mustafa Golubić". We have a match of 75.7%! Administrators do not respond to my requests and I ask you to warn them. Thanks in advance. -Golden Bosnian Lily (talk) 21:38, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, Lily. I see the attempt made at w:bs:Razgovor:Mustafa Golubić. You may want to contact one of admins, like either C3r4 or AnToni (especially by looking at history log), for intervention by stewards. BTW, I compared this revision (different from the previous) with the original source. Since the original source went first, someone should be done about the content. Nevertheless, let's not get too rash to make a decision. Because Bosnian Wikipedia have active admins, here's what the passage from Steward requests/Miscellaneous says: "If the wiki does have active administrators, file the request with one of them." George Ho (talk) 05:07, 22 January 2019 (UTC); edited, 04:04, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

About my edit to the branding headline

Hi George Ho, thanks for helping spread the word about the branding community consultation by posting to the Meta-Wiki Main Page. It was a great idea to put the announcement there.

I have edited the headline to make it consistent with the project announcement. Just for your reference, the proposal actually does not recommend name changes for the projects, except for Wikimedia Commons, which it recommends shortening to WikiCommons to match other project naming conventions. The idea of the "a Wikipedia project" tagline is a minor note and not the core of the proposal. This is explained in the project summary.

Thanks again for helping to foster a productive discussion around these ideas. Feel free to ping me to talk further. ELappen (WMF) (talk) 20:50, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

One question, Ms. Lappen. The mobile view doesn't show much of the Meta's main page content, so the mobile viewers won't see the announcements there. What can be done about the issue? George Ho (talk) 20:56, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Another question: What about posting the central banner about the rebranding on most, if not all, wiki sites? George Ho (talk) 20:59, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Yes, viewing the content on mobile is definitely an issue. There are multiple projects that want to update the main page design for this and other reasons. French Wikipedia did an interesting overhaul recently, that looks pretty good on mobile and may be of interest. I'd suggest writing on the main page's talk page to see if you can spark some discussions around this!

And that's a great question re: a central banner. We've discussed it and see some pros and some cons. Feel free to add that as a section on the talk page and we can see what others think! I'd be curious about people's thoughts. --ELappen (WMF) (talk) 22:28, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

User script to access other watchlists

Hi George Ho,

If you remember, you participated in the 2019 Community Wishlist Survey, including the discussion for reviving "Crosswatch" to allow for cross-wiki watchlists (Community Wishlist Survey 2019/Watchlists/Revive Crosswatch tool).

I sent you this MassMessage because I wanted to let you know that I have made a user script to make accessing your watchlists on different wikis easier, since for now that wishlist item has not been actioned.

The way it works is that, on any wiki, when you look at your watchlist, there is a button labeled "CA" that takes you to the CentralAuth page for you. There, when looking at your own information, each link to a wiki ("meta.wikimedia.org", "www.wikidata.org", "de.wikipedia.org", etc.) is changed so that it links to your watchlist on that wiki.

If you are interested in using it, just add mw.loader.load('//meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:DannyS712/Watchlist.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript'); to your global javascript page. This imports the code at m:User:DannyS712/Watchlist.js.

If you want to learn more, there is documentation for the script available at w:en:User:DannyS712/Watchlist. If you would like to discuss the script, talk to me at m:User talk:DannyS712.

Thanks, --05:50, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Opinion request about a disagreement in the Bulgarian Wikinews

Moved discussion from w:en:User talk:George Ho#Opinion request about a disagreement in the Bulgarian Wikinews

I see that you are aware of the disagreement. There is also a verbose discussion at the voting page in the Bulgarian Wikinews.

We in the Bulgarian Wikinews cannot achieve agreement on two topics about this voting. I see that you have suggested filing a request at m:SRM. Is that your suggestion, or you would prefer some other? Also, I will value highly your opinion on that, should you decide to give it.

Thank you in advance, and please accept my apologies for wasting your time with this request. -- Григор Гачев (talk) 18:27, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Grigor: Either the SRM or Stewards noticeboard (suggested by Cohaf earlier) can do. Either you or Iliev should post a request if you are running out of ways to convince each other or could not agree any further, or I think I may just in case. BTW, since the matter doesn't involve enwiki, I decided to copy-and-paste the message to here instead. You can reply at either Meta-wiki or n:bg:User talk:George Ho. George Ho (talk) 19:30, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Re: Intellectual properties

Please don't use this term.

• https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/not-ipr.en.html
• https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20190910/17343842967/intellectual-property-is-neither-intellectual-property-discuss.shtml

Nemo 07:24, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Key UCOC information from Clinic

Hi George,

Thanks for your participation in today's Clinic - as usual, being able to pin Asaf down gave a few things that the rest of the WMF staff (including the T&S policy team) seemed unwilling to provide (although if I was failing at this level i'd be facing resignation requests by now). I've recorded the below as the principal points, and will attempt to add them to the Draft discussion later.

1. The WMF & Board has definitely decided there WILL be a UCOC
2. The WMF & Board had decided that there would be a UCOC before the strategic recommendation "consultations" even began
3. Yes, it should have been stated right back at the start, before the three consultations phases were wasted by going from an incorrect set of premises
4. Yes, it should be stated at the top of the current UCOC document
5. The WMF is "unable to halt its momentum", so they're unwilling to fix their own mistakes by restarting the four consultation steps so that people are properly informed, despite agreeing that "clock running out" is an issue.
6. Unknown if T&S/Board has specific evidence to back up their assumptions/observations
7. En-wiki conduct is apparently the primary issue hub (not a T&S member, so unsure if based off general WMF views, the actual T&S views, or Asaf's personal knowledge).

Do these seem reasonable summaries? Is there anything key I missed?

Nosebagbear (talk) 14:54, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Nosebagbear. I am a bit disappointed to see myself misquoted on such sensitive issues without even the courtesy of a tagging. My views are not accurately represented in that summary. I don't appreciate your weaving of your own interpretation or wishful thinking with things I actually said. I would like to set the record straight:

• In point of fact, I said a code of conduct was discussed (not decided) even before the strategic recommendation was made (not began); I certainly did not assert the UCoC decision was made any sooner than the board statement announcing it.
• I also did not say WMF "is unable to halt its momentum" or "unwilling to fix their own mistakes"; I said projects have momentum, and to George's explicit question on whether the UCoC process can be stopped, I honestly said that in my view it is unlikely, because the Board has already decided there will be some UCoC, even though its contents are yet TBD, and that, to stop it, one would have to gather and present to the Board overwhelming evidence that conduct and enforcement are not a serious problem on the wikis.
• To your question about whether there exists a document proving the existence of such conduct problems, I said I don't know, as I am not part of the team.
• I mentioned English Wikipedia as a wiki where conduct is unsatisfactorily policed (this is my own phrasing, not the board's), i.e. where too much behavior that is considered unacceptable (harassment, stalking, doxxing) is de facto tolerated, as a (not the) motivator for a Board intervention in the first place. This is my best impression, but I do not speak for the Board, and you may not quote this as an assertion of fact.

As you suggested on my talk page, it may be beneficial to clarify what is and is not being asked of the communities, and what has and has not been decided already, by talking directly with Patrick from the team. I leave it to the two of you to discuss and coordinate if such a call can take place. Asaf (WMF) (talk) 18:07, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

@Asaf (WMF): - i asked George as a 3rd party to see if he could confirm my views before taking them elsewhere, mainly out of a concern to see whether my irritation was affecting my interpretation of your statements. I hadn't planned on dropping them onto the most central discussion location until I had communicated with you (providing whatever amended set came from a less heated reviewed set) and, from your comment, whatever is learnt/confirmed from Patrick. Normally I wouldn't do any non-individual posting until I'd talked to each part of that route, but in this case I'm more restraining from the lead UCOC locations (that is, the behavioural discussion page, the main UCOC discussion page, VPW and the like), due to the limitations on time. Thank you for providing Patrick's details, I shall email him. Nosebagbear (talk) 19:46, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you. I am glad to learn you did intend to run it by me as well before putting it in front of a larger group. Asaf (WMF) (talk) 20:10, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Community Wishlist Survey 2021: Invitation

The 2021 Community Wishlist Survey is now open! This survey is the process where communities decide what the Community Tech team should work on over the next year. We encourage everyone to submit proposals until the deadline on 30 November, or comment on other proposals to help make them better. The communities will vote on the proposals between 8 December and 21 December.

The Community Tech team is focused on tools for experienced Wikimedia editors. You can write proposals in any language, and we will translate them for you. Thank you, and we look forward to seeing your proposals!

SGrabarczuk (WMF)

18:26, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Community Wishlist Survey 2021

We invite all registered users to vote on the 2021 Community Wishlist Survey. You can vote from now until 21 December for as many different wishes as you want.

In the Survey, wishes for new and improved tools for experienced editors are collected. After the voting, we will do our best to grant your wishes. We will start with the most popular ones.

We, the Community Tech, are one of the Wikimedia Foundation teams. We create and improve editing and wiki moderation tools. What we work on is decided based on results of the Community Wishlist Survey. Once a year, you can submit wishes. After two weeks, you can vote on the ones that you're most interested in. Next, we choose wishes from the survey to work on. Some of the wishes may be granted by volunteer developers or other teams.

We are waiting for your votes. Thank you!

SGrabarczuk (WMF)

16:09, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Queering Wikipedia 2023 conference

Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group and the organizing team of Queering Wikipedia is delivering the Queering Wikipedia 2023 Conference for LGBT+ Wikimedians and allies, as a hybrid, bilingual and trans-local event. It is online on 12, 14 and 17 May, the International Day Against Homophobia, Biphobia and Transphobia #IDAHOBIT, with offline events at around 10 locations on 5 continents in the 5-day span as QW2023 Nodes.

The online program is delivered as a series of keynotes, panels, presentations, workshops, lightning talks and creative interventions, starting on Friday noon (UTC) with the first keynote of Dr Nishant Shah entitled: I spy, with my little AI — Wikiway as a means to disrupt the ‘dirty queer’ impulses of emergent AI platforms. Second keynote is at Sunday’s closure by Esra’a Al Shafei, Wikimedia Foundation’s Board of Trustees vice chair, entitled: Digital Public Spaces for Queer Communities.

If you have been an active Wikimedian or enthusiast, supporting LGBT+ activities or if you identify as part of the larger LGBT+ community and allies in Wikimedia, please join us in advancing this thematic work. We encourage you to join online or in person with fellow Wikimedians if it is easy and safe to do so. Our working languages are English and Spanish, with possible local language support at sites of Nodes.

Registration for the online event is free and is open until Wednesday May 10th at 18:00 UTC, for safety protocol. Late event registration approval and event access denial is at the discretion of organizers.

More information, and registration details, may be found on Meta at QW2023

Thanks, from Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:56, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

"Wikifora"

Thanks, George. After giving the matter some thought, I've come to the conclusion that Stack Exchange (now CC BY-SA 4.0) and Fandom.com (CC BY-SA 3.0) seem to be doing the job just fine, and there's no need to silo everything in the commons under the WMF. If, on the other hand, one or other of these went closed-source like WikiTravel, the WMF would absolutely be the right organization to help, as it would be the only organization with anywhere like the resources to take over such large projects from the ruins. So for now, I've put the "Wikifora" idea to bed. The Anome (talk) 13:59, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

Reminder to vote now to ratify the Wikimedia Movement Charter

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to your language

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because you previously voted in the 2021 Movement Charter Drafting Committee (MCDC) election.

This is a reminder that if you have not voted yet on the ratification of the final Wikimedia Movement Charter draft, please do so by July 9, 2024 at 23:59 UTC.

You can read the final text of the Wikimedia Movement Charter in your language. Following that, check on whether you are eligible to vote. If you are eligible, cast your vote on SecurePoll.

On behalf of the Charter Electoral Commission,

RamzyM (WMF) 15:24, 5 July 2024 (UTC)